- 23 -
release from the defamation claim. Each side demanded terms that
the other rejected.
Settlement Reached
On Wednesday, April 24, 1996, only days after petitioner’s
discharge, petitioner and UTA reached an agreement. UTA agreed
to pay petitioner $4 million to settle the defamation claim and
$2 million plus the back-end payments to settle the breach of
contract claim.11 Petitioner wanted payment up front; however,
UTA would not agree to an up-front payment.
At the time of the settlement, the back-end payments were
estimated to be worth approximately $2 million. As of the time
of trial, petitioner had received significantly more than $2
million in back-end payments, and the back-end payments were
continuing to be made to petitioner.
That same day, Ms. Dillman faxed a letter to UTA regarding
the settlement reached between petitioner and UTA (April 24,
1996, letter). Also on that day, Mr. Berkus made handwritten
11 The agreement also consisted of many other monetary and
nonmonetary aspects. These included a confidentiality provision,
petitioner’s right to audit UTA, UTA’s reimbursement of unpaid
expenses petitioner incurred for UTA, UTA’s provision of health
insurance to petitioner, UTA’s payment of petitioner’s accrued
vacation days, UTA’s payment of all petitioner’s legal fees
incurred in connection with “this dispute”, petitioner’s
refraining from interfering with collection of accounts
receivable from petitioner’s clients, petitioner’s refraining
from disclosing UTA trade secrets, petitioner’s ability to
compete against UTA, and the exchange of mutual and general
releases.
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011